A suggestion for all these sign/don't sign the FA debates

by Brian Thomas on Sep 5, 2007 7:57 PM CDT

As discussed nearly ad nauseum here at LSB, our center field future and the upcoming FA market, coupled with the current rebuilding effort, pose a real dilemma. In fact, it's no stretch to call it a mystery. A mystery wrapped around a riddle, inside an enigma, no doubt, with conundrums standing watch, vigilantly. And there's most likely a quandary tapping the phone lines.

Instead of this asserting "no way on Hunter/Rowand/etc, he'll cost us 6/92.33," why doesn't everybody just name a figure/# of years they would be comfortable with?

Because it seems to me that a few of these figures fellas are floating might be nothing more than Buster Olney ass-extraction.

I just have a really hard time seeing how Torii rates 95 million and Cameron might only cost 18, I guess, is my belated point.

The proposal: everyone hi/low some figures for the 08 crop: Hunter, Jones, Rowand, Cameron, etc., and support the feasibility.

Also, two questions:

Why is Ben's nickname "scoonie?"

Has Longhorn ever been laid (with a woman, I mean)?

Discuss.

Tweet Comment 39 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

you had me

at hello

Al Gore 2008 http://www.myspace.com/igotsculture

by gossamer on Sep 5, 2007 7:48 PM CDT reply actions

ok

this is what I would be comfortable with giving these guys. these figures WOULDN'T get them signed though.

Andruw Jones - 5 years, 40 million

Torri Hunter - 3 years, 20 million

Aaron Rowand - 5 years, 30 million

Mike Cameron - 3 years, 18 million

that's a pay cut for everybody but rowand.

i just really don't like going after any of those guys. i know, i'm weird.

Al Gore 2008 http://www.myspace.com/igotsculture

by gossamer on Sep 5, 2007 7:56 PM CDT reply actions

Umm...

If Gary I'm 31 years old and HGH revived my contract season Matthews Jr. got 5 years 50 million, then my goodness 5 years 30 million is a pay cut for Aaron Rowand. Have you noticed what one demensional/unreliable players have gotten lately (Carlos Lee- a dh in the NL/ JD Drew and his 7 hrs/ etc.)? I'd have to believe a two way centerfielder would have to receive a nice payday.

by slimshadty12 on Sep 5, 2007 8:52 PM CDT up reply actions

it's a pay cut for everybody but rowand

based on what they currently make.

i wasn't talking about market value.

Al Gore 2008 http://www.myspace.com/igotsculture

by gossamer on Sep 5, 2007 8:54 PM CDT up reply actions

Good...

I was worried there for a sec.

by slimshadty12 on Sep 5, 2007 9:08 PM CDT up reply actions

hey tosser

how's the g?

"Jon Daniels is going to end up being the best thing to ever happen to the Texas Rangers." - me, a long time ago...

by Longhorn on Sep 5, 2007 7:58 PM CDT reply actions

I guess that would be a "no"?

But that river of tears has dried for all of us.

by trza on Sep 5, 2007 8:16 PM CDT up reply actions

Byrd

for under a mil

by corbsclinton on Sep 5, 2007 8:12 PM CDT reply actions

Hunter

for whatever

by meatbonelefty on Sep 5, 2007 8:14 PM CDT reply actions

um

Hunter 3/30
Jones 5/70
Rowand 4/40
Cameron 3/25
Patterson (for Dirk) 3/12

Probably low-balling it slightly (Hunter in particular), but each seems reasonable to me.

But that river of tears has dried for all of us.

by trza on Sep 5, 2007 8:22 PM CDT reply actions

You know

Hunter turned down a 3 yr. 45 mil. contract right? Rowand might be asking for more too

by meatbonelefty on Sep 5, 2007 8:27 PM CDT reply actions

freeagents

Hunter 4/48
Jones 5/60
Rowand 4/36
cameron 2/18

those are numbers i'd like, but what i THINK they will get.

Hunter 5/75
Jones 5/70
rowand 5/50
cameron 3/27

Can you please Look into getting a less funny signature? That's sarcasm, btw. - Sharky

by rentz on Sep 5, 2007 8:29 PM CDT reply actions

and longhorn?

I will not get my comeuppance!

by Brian Thomas on Sep 5, 2007 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions

well

every girls gotten really drunk at a party at some point right?

Can you please Look into getting a less funny signature? That's sarcasm, btw. - Sharky

by rentz on Sep 5, 2007 8:35 PM CDT up reply actions

do you really think...

Hunter will get more than Andruw??

That's not gonna happen.

by Brian Hayes on Sep 5, 2007 9:28 PM CDT up reply actions

botts

geez. he can't hit a 91mph pitch right down the middle?

Forget Johnny Bench, we got Gerry "the Jet" Laird

by ab03 on Sep 5, 2007 8:30 PM CDT reply actions

I guess I'm the high roller

But I'd be ok with:
Jones 5/90
Hunter 4/60
Rowand 3/35
Cameron 3/12
Patterson 3/12

I'd pay Jones like a top end player because I think he is still very good and Hunter I see being productive for at least 3 more years. Rowand I just don't have enough faith in and if you are getting Cameron or Patterson you aren't getting frontline guys so don't pay them anything over what Cat/DeRosa got

by bushe on Sep 5, 2007 8:41 PM CDT reply actions

those deals for Jones and Hunter

seem pretty fair to me. I wouldn't mind signing either for that term and that amount.

Saltalamacchia: one player, six vowels.

by tricer on Sep 5, 2007 11:23 PM CDT up reply actions

i'm really really

cheap :)

Al Gore 2008 http://www.myspace.com/igotsculture

by gossamer on Sep 5, 2007 8:45 PM CDT reply actions

well it would be stupid

but i don't care if they gave hunter or jones 5/100 as long as we didn't hear the franchise cry broke in 2 years. I'm all about spending money reasonably and building from within but if this team is going to go after any free agents i don't want to hear about them regretting their signings. BTW I'd much rather see trades for C. Crawford (impossible I know) and A. Dunn. The biggest problem with those are giving up your new found farm system and paying those guys.

by j d on Sep 5, 2007 8:56 PM CDT up reply actions

Thanks Mr Daniels

It's nice of you to post here.

If Lindsey Lohan, Kobe Bryant, or a democrat politician was dogfighting, they'd walk and we all know it.

by Sharky on Sep 6, 2007 6:09 AM CDT up reply actions

Question: Hunter or Jones

who do you think will get paid more (aggregate and per year)?

Seems obvious to me it will be hunter but trying to figure out if jones is going to be peddled as a franchise star or not.

Forget Johnny Bench, we got Gerry "the Jet" Laird

by ab03 on Sep 5, 2007 8:59 PM CDT reply actions

jones and hunter

i think hunter gets more, as jones isn't having the best of years.

Can you please Look into getting a less funny signature? That's sarcasm, btw. - Sharky

by rentz on Sep 5, 2007 9:06 PM CDT up reply actions

no way

Jones has been a considerably better player over the course of their careers and is several years younger. Despite his awful year, he's gonna get more than Hunter and I doubt it will be all that close.

by Brian Hayes on Sep 5, 2007 9:31 PM CDT up reply actions

In

agreement. Jones is superior, not close.

"No team has any major strengths as all NFL players are roughly the same. If you cant run on third and one it isn't because of your players." - Sharky

by inactive lsb user on Sep 5, 2007 9:37 PM CDT up reply actions

If I were Boras

I'd peddle Jones as a 1-year deal.

The down year plus unusually fat FA competition this winter could mean that he'd do a good deal better next offseason.

I will not get my comeuppance!

by Brian Thomas on Sep 5, 2007 9:10 PM CDT up reply actions

not bad all year

OPS by month:
.936
.629
.487
.935
.769
.708 (so far)

Two outstanding months, two terrible months and two middling, for a total OPS of .746. His post all-star break # is .794. Hardly awe-inspiring, but it makes me think he really just had a terrible slump instead of just suddenly falling off the face of the earth at age 30. I think there has been a little Chicken Littleism in the media and among fans this year when it concerns Young. I'd still pay him $15-18 a year to man CF in Arlington.

Now, Longhorn? Considering his average post, I hope his eventual mate likes quickies.

Signature

by t ball on Sep 5, 2007 11:35 PM CDT up reply actions

given age and past performance

I would argue A.J. will be paid more.....also Jones' agent may have something to say about that.

One thing that may happen though is if Jones takes a one year deal to rebuild his "franchise" image and then hit the market big in 2009.

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates

by slc ranger on Sep 5, 2007 9:10 PM CDT up reply actions

I don't think its close

Jones is going to make a half again more than Hunter due to 2 things: consistant power and Scott Boras. Then factor in that he is younger and has been healthier and I think he makes quite a bit more. But then I am an AJ fan

by bushe on Sep 5, 2007 9:19 PM CDT up reply actions

Nicknames...

Adam and I lived together in Austin for a period of time when I was about 19. He calls people by nicknames (just about everybody)... one of my girlfriends, a Mexican girl named Jennifer, he called "Esmerelda." This girl someone tried to fix him up with was called "Grimace" (not like the facial expression, like the purple thing at McDonalds).

Anyway, around that time he began calling me "Poochie" (after the character on Itchy and Scratchy, because he says I'm "in your face") and "Scoonie" (because he thought Scoonie Penn was a funny name, apparently). They both irritated me, and that's as good a reason as any for a nickname to stick. For the past 5 or 6 years, he's called me on most weekdays on his way home from work and opened the call by saying "Scoonie! Scoonie Scoon! What's up there, Scoonie?" Now, I've embraced it. My other family members refer to me as "Scoon," and I frequently sing a bastardized version of "Fergalicious" called "Scoonalicious." My girlfriend says that when I'm trying to be cute when she's mad at me, that I'm trying to "scoon-fluence" her.

Now aren't you glad you asked?

by benmor78 on Sep 6, 2007 1:03 AM CDT reply actions

i was fine...

...i didn't laugh until 'scoon-ilicious'...

now i can't stop

don't feed the sharkys...

by ivysafety39 on Sep 6, 2007 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions

Projected Hi/Lo

Hi:
Jones- 6 years, 110 million (and truly anything is possible after Zito last year.)
Hunter- 5 years, 85 million
Rowand- 5 years, 60 million
Cameron- 3 years, 25 million

Low:

Jones- 4 years, 60 million
Hunter- 4 years, 50 million
Rowand- 3 years, 35 million
Cameron- 2 years, 18 million

by slimshadty12 on Sep 6, 2007 1:20 AM CDT reply actions

What I would pay

Jones 5/55 (he's a star off a bad year, and Jayson Stark doesn't like him, so he must be good)
Hunter 4/36
Rowand 3/21
Cameron 2/16

In the event ARod signs elsewhere, clearing some payroll over the next few years, I'd be willing to go maybe 1 million more per player.

I think only Cameron could be obtained that cheaply...

by JBImaknee on Sep 6, 2007 2:28 AM CDT reply actions

Also

I'd give Adam Dunn 5/60 to play in Texas, if he hits the market.

by JBImaknee on Sep 6, 2007 2:30 AM CDT up reply actions

Really?

You wouldn't go 4/40 on Hunter?

That's odd.

The 40 trumps all!

by thedirkatron on Sep 6, 2007 8:31 AM CDT up reply actions

Hunter

I just don't think he's very good.

He's had only two seasons of >120 OPS, including this year. His OBP is perpetually around .330 - so the team would only be treading water in that category by adding him.

His value would have to come on defense, where I think he would continue to perform at a higher level than anyone else we'd reasonably get. But is that worth 8 digits for 4 years? I don't really think so.

Bottom line: My litmus test for adding a player is whether they are better than Michael Young - because I feel that Michael Young needs to be at most the average player on the team for it to win.

I think Torii Hunter is better than Young, but not by THAT much. So I'm happy to add him, I just wouldn't committ too much money to him.

Also, the question is what would I be comfortable with. If we got him for a little more (4/40, even 4/44), I don't think I would be mad. But I wouldn't be giddy about it either.

by JBImaknee on Sep 6, 2007 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions

I like

your litmus test. Its expensive, but its a good way to think about things, especially if you are talking about winning a series. So under your test, who do you replace off our current team to compete for the championship?

by corbsclinton on Sep 6, 2007 3:26 PM CDT up reply actions

Mike Young Litmus Test

The way I would set it up is that of the nine regular players on the team, at least 4 should be "better" than Young. Also, at minimum, Young should also be the average player - the 4 guys worse than him cannot be so bad that they outweigh the 4 guys who are better than him. I think this is the situation now, actually.

Obviously this has to take position into account, as Young is a league-average hitter overall but at a low-offense position (making him a slightly above average asset).

This is how I see things right now in the near future (1 to 2 years):

Blalock (3b), Kinsler (2b) and Salty (C) are capable of being slightly more productive than Young in the near future

Cat (OF) should be about the same/slightly worse as Young (considering position)

The rest of the outfield, DH, and 1b look like they will be significantly worse than Young in the near term unless something is done. These are huge holes right now, and holes in typically offensive positions (other than CF)

I would say that the Rangers would need to get at least one guy who is significantly better than Young to make up for some of these big sinks, and one guy to fill in one of the other holes.

For example, if you were to add Adam Dunn (1b/DH) and someone like Cameron (CF), you would have this situation

Dunn (DH)
Kinsler
Cameron (CF)
Blalock
Salty
YOUNG
Cat (1b)
Byrd (LF)
Cruz (RF)

by JBImaknee on Sep 6, 2007 5:15 PM CDT up reply actions